Won't it make a run on the banks more likely...

dopester

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

You're making some pretty sweeping statements about me there. Too big a mortgage bought too early? Nope, traded up from the last house where we made 120% of the price we paid as profit. We were banking £600 a month for the first few years since we moved in - thats not gone as the family has expanded and my wife has stopped working full time. A choice we maid yes and I am fine with it.

And where did you think I have a hang up about savers? All I am saying is that the interest of people worried about declining interest on savings has to be weighed against the worry of the million or so being dumped onto the dole and those people losing their homes as a result. My comment on attitudes was that too many people have no interest in anyone but themselves - as I'm on a fixed rate mortgage until May 11 (and very happy having saved a bomb as rates shot up far above what I am paying pretty much upon taking the thing out) I'm not making any cash on dropping interest rates nor am I losing earnings on savings. I'm not worried about negative equity (nor in it yet) nor am I in imminent danger of losing my job.

So I have nothing personal in this. I get why people get upset when it affects them, but some people would be happy to screw over others if it keeps them OK. And thats not the kind of position Cyril would have supported either as you will fully well know.

After making 120% on your previous property before "trading up", did the trade-up involve you taking on a great deal more debt? That is another trap of the boom.

Bought too early, or fell in to the trade-up extra-debt trap. Both similar mistakes to make in my opinion. Generally a crash hits more expensive properties. A 30% crash on a £100,000 house is easier to manage for some than a 30% crash on a £200,000 house.

It is true. I have my own interest in mind. Screw over who exactly? The people who are losing jobs and going on to the dole, after a 11 year boom, don't take priority over savers.

Us savers, FTBs for example, look out and can only see house prices at mega-expensive levels, requiring us to save towards buying and taking on big mortgages. We've got to look out for ourselves.

You can't have it all ways... crazily expensive house prices across the nation, but no one saving towards buying, and savers cast off as less important than those who haven't taken any measures to save for some financial protection.

Chris2685

dopester is wise.

FairyElephant_2

Well, I've dumped most of savings into my mortgage, since the rate I was getting in interest has dropped below my mortgage rate (carefully leaving enough for 6 months living expenses, minus the mortgage payments - as I can 'use up' the overpayments I have made, in a savings account at the best rate I could find).
I am not spending more though, even though my required mortgage payments have reduced, I'm still making the same payments and will therefore (unless something goes wrong) be paid off several years early.
Hopefully by then the economy will have recovered, and I can save for early retirement.

During the last recession I struggled, even though it was not as bad as this one seems to be getting, because I foolishly had debts and negative equity (bought into the panic to get on the housing market ladder), so I have spent the intervening years trying to make sure that never happens to me again - 'once bitten' & all that!

ad9898_3

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

You're making some pretty sweeping statements about me there.

What ??, and you didn't make any sweeping statements about savers ??, hypocrisy, are you a NuLab member by any chance, at a guess I would say you are, it's seems like it's you who can't see past the end of your socialist nose.

Nice rebuttal by the way dopester

Decadent_Fool

Chris2685 wrote: »

...on the edge of a full blown run on every bank in the UK?

Please don't mention the R word - as a financial stock holder it makes my bum bum go all '50p - 5p'

JFC_2

I can understand both of the sides here.

Savings are needed for cusioning the blow in case of unemployment.
Savings (and the interest of savings) are often relied on by pensioners to make their retirement comfortable.
Savings are needed to build up a deposit for large investments such as a home or car
Savings are important to the nation, to avoid people spending above their in come on credit


But

I can relate to the other side too.

Many are now out of work and have found themself without a job, home etc. Sleepless night spent worrying about whether you will be able to provide shelter or food for your loved ones etc., many have had savings but used them up trying to save their home as their montly income has dried up.

Remember we are all in danger of becoming the latter, jobs losses are increasing and no one knows which industry will be hit next.

housesitter

I've been made redundant in the pat. From working in IT back in 2005.
I took a month off to get my life in order, wound own my outgoings (rent was 400 quid) and went to the temp agency.
I ended up working doing the following:

Packing crisps in boxes.
Traffic surveys - actually really well paid.
Buy bits from scrap yards and using ebay.


I ended up being inventive with my CV and getting into IT contracting but in the sort term I went out and got a job.
People are complaining about loosing their job. So you cut back, do whatever work you can and show some self preservation.

Give me a candidate who has been sweeping the town centre rather than the guy on the dole any time.

Just aim to have outgoings where you can still pay them with massively reduced salary. It's as easy to do as it is to say. Don't over stretch in the first place, see HPI and why so many of us chose not to be on the ladder.
As a FTB I'm looking to buy at a point where if I loose my well paid job, I'll still be able to pay the mortgage working for minimum wage.

Isn't that common sense, or just what those more geared towards the ideas of saving actually do?

Cannon_Fodder

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

Whines about savings rates are a wonderfully middle-class thing - unless you are so self-obsessed that you can't see past the end of your nose.

Typical Left-wing politics of envy.

Finally, we get to understand The Idiots grand plan - to bring everyone down to the lowest common denominator = everyone will be equal alright = equally broke.

Cannon_Fodder

ps, I've just been served with "At Risk" letter section 188...

so, I know EXACTLY what you mean by;

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

set it against people in real danger of losing their job

Rochdale_Pioneers

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

Typical Left-wing politics of envy.

I don't envy other people's savings. You work hard you earn cash you spend and save.

I just happen to think that the effects on your savings interest rate is a little less drastic event to the effect on your life of losing your job and your home. Would be fun to put a wannabe whiner and a newly redundant factory worker in the same room and see if the whiner can persuade the unemployed that their loss of job income and self respect is less of an issue than their savings earning 3% less a year.

Cannon_Fodder wrote: »

ps, I've just been served with "At Risk" letter section 188....

So what is more important to you? Protecting your savings interest rate a few percent? Or protecting jobs and industry? At the moment we have to choose between one or the other.